Re: Concerning Keyboard Status Menu

[Note: I'm not a GNOME developer, I don't have Git access, I'm not part of any conspiracy, but I'm actively working on improving the inputting experience for Traditional Chinese in Hong Kong] On Thursday, November 22, 2012 05:01 PM, Ma Xiaojun wrote: However, why the menu in keyboard status

Re: Concerning Keyboard Status Menu

On Friday, November 23, 2012 07:39 AM, Ma Xiaojun wrote: In case you don't know. Unlike other language groups, Chinese users are used to the fact there are many third-party engines available for same input scheme and they would make a random or non-random choices between them. Could it be

Re: Concerning Keyboard Status Menu

On Friday, November 23, 2012 11:11 AM, Ma Xiaojun wrote: On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 8:09 PM, Mathieu Bridon boche...@fedoraproject.org wrote: Could it be because none of them are of sufficient quality that they feel the need to constantly try new ones, in the hopes that it will be better than

Re: Concerning Keyboard Status Menu

On Friday, November 23, 2012 01:42 PM, Ma Xiaojun wrote: On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 10:24 PM, Mathieu Bridon boche...@fedoraproject.org wrote: What I actually find very rude of you is that you seem to somehow interpret my messages as having some kind of background intent. I was asking a question

Re: Concerning Keyboard Status Menu

On Friday, November 23, 2012 06:01 PM, Pierre-Yves Luyten wrote: Maybe should first step be listing different functional principles, for example * Input from sound (pinyin input methods) * Input from shape (canjie) * Input from shape (wubi) There will be a significant list, but not infinite.

Re: The name of applications on GNOME 3.7.92 testing image

On Saturday, March 23, 2013 02:11 AM, Maciej Piechotka wrote: On Fri, 2013-03-22 at 12:51 -0400, Jasper St. Pierre wrote: gedit is becoming more of a programmer's editor, so the gedit team wants to keep the gedit brand while people work on a new simple Notepad-equivalent that will be called

Re: Feature proposal: combined system status menu

On Wed, 2013-04-24 at 04:00 +0300, Luc Pionchon wrote: On 24 April 2013 02:14, Florian Müllner fmuell...@gnome.org wrote: On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 11:09 PM, Marco Scannadinari ma...@scannadinari.co.uk wrote: I think your suggestion of a feature branch can be a worthy compromise, though.

Re: libgsystem as a shared library

On Wed, 2014-02-05 at 11:24 -0500, Jasper St. Pierre wrote: I mean, copylibs have existed forever, usually by just copying files around from project A to project B, and back from project B to project A. Why does structuring this process in a git submodule make it suddenly illegal in Fedora

Re: help needed for OSK layout files

Hi, On Mon, 2015-01-19 at 15:49 +0900, Daiki Ueno wrote: Hello, There is a long-standing request that gnome-shell OSK should respect system's keyboard layout[1]. Though actually it works already, we are still missing the majority of layout files (see

Re: help needed for OSK layout files

On Mon, 2015-01-19 at 15:46 +0530, anish patil wrote: On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 3:35 PM, Mathieu Bridon boche...@fedoraproject.org wrote: Would it make sense to add Caribou layouts for input methods? For example, the Cangjie input method uses the en_US layout

Re: Clone of 2048 for Gnome

On Thu, 2015-01-08 at 11:24 +0100, Alexandre Franke wrote: On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 12:30 AM, Marc-André Lureau marcandre.lur...@gmail.com wrote: - wouldn't it be nice to have some kind of congrats feedback when you reach 2048? That's the single thing that annoys me with the original 2048:

Re: builddir != srcdir in jhbuild breaks my workflow

On Fri, 2016-09-02 at 08:09 +, philip.chime...@gmail.com wrote: > On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 5:43 AM Michael Catanzaro g> wrote: > > On Tue, 2016-08-30 at 21:25 +, philip.chime...@gmail.com wrote: > > > I've been thinking about the exact same thing recently; how about >

Re: Gnome "opt-in" functionality.

Hi, On Fri, 2016-09-16 at 11:00 +0100, Sam Thursfield wrote: > You can disable Tracker's background indexing fairly easily, if you > don't mind that some things will get broken. In most distros, if you > move the files /etc/xdg/autostart/tracker*.desktop somewhere else, > then the Tracker

Re: Building GNOME in restrictive network environments

I've just gotten bitten by this as well, and have started moving all the ones in gnome-apps-nightly from git:// to https:// -- Mathieu On Mon, 2017-07-31 at 14:15 +0100, Bastian Ilso wrote: > We also experienced this issue at the newcomers workshop as many > flatpak manifests also download

Re: Building GNOME in restrictive network environments

I just fixed all the .json manifests and .app files in the master branch of gnome-apps-nightly, as well as the .json manifest for the master branch of the GNOME Sdk. -- Mathieu On Mon, 2017-07-31 at 15:40 +0200, Mathieu Bridon wrote: > I've just gotten bitten by this as well, and have star

Re: Stackexchange community for GNOME/GTK+

On Wed, 2017-05-10 at 09:30 -0400, Carlos Soriano via desktop-devel- list wrote: > Is there some public place that offer something similar as AskFedora > to create a community for GNOME? > I think one requirement for us is to not host it ourselves, and still > be relevant. > I guess that's why Sri

Re: Proposal to deploy GitLab on gnome.org

On Wed, 2017-05-17 at 16:47 +0200, Jehan Pagès wrote: > IMO this is a completely broken and over-complicated workflow. For > long term contributors, having their own remote can be > understandable. > But for one-time contribs? One-time contributions can be done entirely in the web UI, for

Re: Proposal to deploy GitLab on gnome.org

On Wed, 2017-05-17 at 17:44 +0200, Jehan Pagès wrote: > On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 5:01 PM, Mathieu Bridon <boche...@daitauha.fr > > wrote: > > On Wed, 2017-05-17 at 16:47 +0200, Jehan Pagès wrote: > > > IMO this is a completely broken and over-complicated workflow

Re: Proposal to deploy GitLab on gnome.org

On Wed, 2017-05-17 at 15:55 +0200, Bastien Nocera wrote: > If I'm a registered developer for the GNOME org, or that particular > module, I'd create my merge requests as wip branches in the main > repo?Or as branches in a separate repo that I have the control of? That would be up to you. Choose

Re: Proposal to deploy GitLab on gnome.org

On Tue, 2017-05-23 at 15:13 +0300, Adrian Perez de Castro wrote: > Hi there, > > No strong opinion here about GitLab, just a comment below... > > On Tue, 23 May 2017 11:21:25 +0200, Felipe Borges il.com> wrote: > > > [...] > > > > Cons: > > - not a big fan of the

Re: Pilot GitLab program

On Tue, 2017-06-27 at 08:08 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 3:54 AM, Carlos Soriano   > wrote: > > Expect Nautilus and librsvg (with Federico) to move to the pilot  > > program this week. > > Cool. I would just suggest making sure that your interns

Re: Pilot GitLab program

Hi, On Wed, 2017-06-28 at 08:42 +0200, Milan Crha wrote: > On Tue, 2017-06-27 at 10:54 +0200, Carlos Soriano wrote: > > We’ve been collecting the feedback on this wiki page: > > https://wiki.gnome.org/Initiatives/DevelopmentInfrastructure/Commun > > ityInput > > c) I generate NEWS file from `git

Re: Matrix as a replacement for Telepathy

On Fri, 2017-08-25 at 19:13 +0100, Matthew Hodgson wrote: > My proposal is that one could run a background daemon on Linux which > brokered the connection to your Matrix server (and perhaps handled > fun stuff like clientside history persistence, e2e encryption voodoo, > WebRTC audio

Re: [GitLab] IMPORTANT: Mass migration plan

On Wed, 2018-03-21 at 11:22 +0100, Arnaud Bonatti wrote: > Hi Milan, > > 2018-03-21 8:53 UTC+01:00, Milan Crha : > > Your module rename may mean also renaming in distributions, thus it > > should not be done in a rush and "just because we can". At least > > from my point of

Re: [GitLab] IMPORTANT: Mass migration plan

On Wed, 2018-03-21 at 06:28 -0400, Carlos Soriano wrote: > > Any chance of getting > https://gitlab.gnome.org/Incubator/bztogl/issues/7 fixed before then? > > Not sure, I think impersonating is still something some people don't > agree with. It's what the Gitlab "Import from Github" feature

Re: Heads up: Geary mainline development branch renamed to `mainline`

On Fri, 2019-04-26 at 10:38 +0200, Niels De Graef via desktop-devel- list wrote: > Note that you don't need to script this kind of stuff, if you use the > following tricks: > > # 1. This creates a symbolic link from master to mainline, which > solves your problem already. > $ git symbolic-ref